Re: Real mathematics vs FOL
- From: Nam Nguyen <namducnguyen@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2006 14:26:42 GMT
biubo wrote:
"Nam Nguyen" <namducnguyen@xxxxxxx> wrote:biubo wrote:I have two questions:It would be helpful if you could give some ideas as to what you
1)Can you show me some mathematical results which cannot be translated into first order logic?
2) I remember that once I read on a book of Ebbinghaus, Flum, Thomas that in f.o. logic you can not define the concept of torsion group.
Is the theory of torsion groups out of the scope of FOL ?
think "real mathematics" should be.
the common mathematics, the one that you can do without knowing much about logic.
OK. In that sense then I don't know much about 2) but regarding to
1), at least SR cannot be faithfully translated into FOL. (Think about
the impossibility of formalizing the relativity of events'
simultaneity.)
--
-----------------------------------------------------
What we call 'I' is just a swinging door which moves
when we inhale and exhale.
Shunryu Suzuki
----------------------------------------------------
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Real mathematics vs FOL
- From: biubo
- Re: Real mathematics vs FOL
- References:
- Real mathematics vs FOL
- From: biubo
- Re: Real mathematics vs FOL
- From: Nam Nguyen
- Re: Real mathematics vs FOL
- From: biubo
- Real mathematics vs FOL
- Prev by Date: Re: Infinity Again
- Next by Date: Re: Question about Quine's New Foundations
- Previous by thread: Re: Real mathematics vs FOL
- Next by thread: Re: Real mathematics vs FOL
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|